I'm making a version of the Ti Goat cylinder stove and am about do drill the intake holes and the feeder hole in the end plate, my question...

Does anyone have one of the Ti Goat stoves that they could measure the diameter of the intake holes/feeder hole and let me know? I don't want to rip off Ti Goat's work, however I would like to get the dimensions correct to make sure my stove has the proper air intake...

Many thanks!

Adam, I just made the same stove last week. I placed (5) 3/8" holes right below the feed door. As far as the door goes, I made that as large as the endplate would possibly allow so I wouldn't have to fight to feed the stove. With a 3" diameter, 9' pipe the stove drafted hard enough to shut the door on it's own!

Edited by hammer-one on 04/03/2012 21:03:53 MDT.

If you build it out of stainless it needs those holes, if you build it out of titanium, it does not need those holes. The pictures on the tigoat sight are old, they no longer have/need the holes. Good design in titanium negates their need.

Hi Josh

That must be one of the most obscure comments I have read for a while! It sounds as though you are saying that a Ti stove does not need air inlet holes, but a SS one does. I am sure that is wrong, so could you please explain?

Cheerts

@George - nice work! How do you plan on doing the legs? I was thinking about riviting t-nuts to the end plates (much like the Ed T stoves) however I was also thinking it would be easy to just run a bolt throgh the end plate edge and stove body and lock it down on the other side with a wing nut...

@Josh - my end plates are titanium (snow peak plates) but my body will be SS (at least for now). Do you think I will need intake holes?

There is no difference between how a ti or ss stove will draft, all things being equal. The end plates on my stove are ti, as is the damper assembly. I'm not sure why the lower holes are gone on the newer tigoat stove, except to say it looks like the door might not be a 100% seal, letting some air draft through. When I close the door with the damper wide open the air being drawn in through the front acts like a magnet drawing the flame to the front of the firebox. The stove actually roars when the damper is open full.

@Adam, if you notice there are a couple of "extra" holes in the front. I actually bent some aluminum rod to insert in those holes to function as legs.

I'm already on version 2.0. I'm waiting on ss plates for the end, and will probably weld washers to the plates so I can insert threaded rod to hold everything together instead of cable and turnbuckles. I think this will go together a little faster. I also think I will weld legs similar to the ti goat legs to my endplates, but I have to get that far first.I'll be sure to update with pics when I get all my materials.

Adam, With a stainless body, you will want air intake holes.

Rodger, this a simple and accurate statement, it is not obscure. Stainless stoves will need additional air intake holes, titanium stoves will not.

George, All things being equal, a titanium stove and a stainless stove, will not draft the same. They burn different, they draft different, they cook different, they heat different, they are just flat different. Of course the only thing I have to back this up, is designing the first roll up cylinder stove, and having hundreds of hours of burn time on them, so I could be wrong.

Hi Josh

> Stainless stoves will need additional air intake holes, titanium stoves will not.
Well, I don't understand. I have a PhD in Physics, and I like to understand these things. Now, don't get me wrong: I place experimental data above theory every day. So if you see differences, I believe you.

My problem is that SS and Ti are both hard metals with poor thermal conductivity. I cannot understand how two stoves made of the different materials but otherwise identical in design can have different airflows and (therefore) different burning behaviour. Of course, it is possible that there are differences in the design between the two versions due to the difficulties in machining Ti.

So, basically, educate me! A few others might also be interested as well. Tell us all.

Cheers

Rodger

I cant say too much, I've already put allot of money in other peoples pockets as is. The simple explanation is the thermal efficiency of Ti increases, exponentially, as it heats up. The thermal efficiency of SS decreases as it heats up. So one pours heat outward, while one tends to shield the heat inward. This affects the way they burn, which affects the input and output flows. One particular aspect is the tempature of the gas exiting, and at different elevations of the pipe. In a stainless steel stove(specifically one with a stainless pipe) the temps in the pipe can be several hundred degrees higher than those in a Ti pipe, from a Ti stove. Because of these temp differences, it matters where and how combustion air is introduced into the stove. So Ti has some physics working in its favor, but design plays an important role also. Rockets hanging out the end of a tent may look "cool", but they dont heat or cook well. They are just the children of poor design, and improperly utilized materials. Dot get me wrong, SS can work as a stove material, but there things to overcome. There is a SS cylinder stove, that will be comercially available, that at least from my first looks, appears to address some of these things. And where weight is not of the utmost concern, SS is an affordable option.

Josh, as Roger says, please educate me. How (or where) do you introduce fresh intake air in a ti stove, as opposed to the front intake of a ss version. Since I am not interested in building an all ti version (or a commercial version for that matter)I won't take offense if this data is considered "sensitive". Just curious since, like Adam, this is more of a DIY project for me than anything. I'm actually considering buying a "pro built" box stove. In that regard would I be better off with say an all ti version like Seek, or a SS version like Kifaru?

Also, I went with a longer pipe because I was concerned about exhaust smoke entering the vents on my tent (Golite Shangra La 5). How do I determine the optimal length of my flue pipe?

Like most others here, I'm always looking to learn something. Or as I used to say, "If you ain't learning, you're not paying attention". :)

Enough said for me Josh, I'll take your word for it!

Thanks so much for the insight!

I agree a flaming pipe looks cool and makes people think the stove is working but in reality the opposite is true.

Hi Josh

You have done the experiments, I haven't. So in essence what you are saying is that my assumption that the SS and Ti metals will behave similarly was wrong. OK, fascinating stuff.

I understand about design issues in general of course. Been there many times. We look forward to future developments.

Cheers

As always(well maybe not always, j/k), Roger says it best. I am pretty happy with what I assembled and did not intend to hijack the thread. I got a clean burn with no flame or smoke that burned completely down to a nice little pile of ash.

Anything you choose to share is appreciated, Josh, anything you choose to hold onto is respectfully understood.

Adam, good luck and keep us posted on your progress.

Kevin, maybe you could help answer my question - how do I determined optimal pipe length? What I'm doing (9' flue pipe) works, but I don't understand heat distribution in the pipe and will concede might not be the best setup. As I stated earlier, I was concerned about stove exaust in my tent. The peak of my shelter is 6' w/ vents near the top.

Edited by hammer-one on 04/09/2012 16:42:39 MDT.

If you have a spark arrester , you really just need enough length to exit the tent plus a margin of safety, some of it depends on how high your stove is and how clean your burn is, however I would never recommend a 9 ft pipe in our tent that is about 6 ft tall. I would generally recommend about 7 ft.

Kevin, thanks for the reply. I am using a damper and spark arrestor. I'll take your advice and cut the length to 7' . I appreciate your help.

George

It is as much about quantity, as it is about location. At least with the front of a cylinder stove. The additional internal heat of a SS stove causes excessive "over draft". To deal with this, larger pipes are helpful, as is the additional intake holes on the front of the stove. Adding additional air at the wrong place, in either Ti or SS, will create undesirable burn conditions. This is sometimes done through bad design, both accidentally, and intentionally.

Longer pipes are good. If built right, 9' pipes in 6' tents work just fine. Spark arresters plug up, and I dont reccomend them, they can actually be dangerous. Prudent use of a good damper, with a long pipe, is your best bet.

To answer your question about which stove, I would say neither. While I am of course biased, scientificly speaking, the K-stoves suck. The other stove is just a K-stove knock off, at least by design. Though it is at least Ti. I am probably not giving enough credit to the damper design though, great improvement, based off one purchased from TiGoat. But its not balanced, or properly adjustable.

Not a knock of, the only real similarity is using threaded rods. Size, seams , door and damper are much different. The damper was not based as you said , in fact it is much different, in shape, size and construction, it looks like a real damper on a regular stove.

Josh and Kevin, I appreciate both of your input. I am aware of both of your backgrounds on the subject of stove design (or at least who you are and where you came from). I also know that sometime between now and September I will be buying a box stove b/c I believe it will be better for cooking and hot tenting next winter than the cylinder stoves I have been tinkering with. If either or both would like to address some basics for a guy like me to look for in stove design either here or in a pm I welcome it. I have heard in other places that spark arrestors are a bad idea, and I will follow that advice. I think I'll keep tinkering with pipe length, since there seems to be no concensus and so far I guess I've been lucky with my chosen length. I will say that I'm a little confused by "if they are built right". My pipe is .005 ss shim, 12x108, with a ti goat end ring and ti goat ti damper in the 3.125 size. I assuming you mean not so much about rolling the pipe as much as damper, etc.

I'm of the same school as Roger - I like to know why what I'm doing should or shouldn't be working, even if it is :). What I don't want to do is throw gasoline on a fire and cause two respected members here to feel like they have to defend their positions and or reputations.

I see that since I am no longer a member (sorry, not getting into that discussion)there doesn't seem to be a pm address in my profile. I am at georgecarr@trailreadyoutdoors.com .

Edited by hammer-one on 04/10/2012 15:21:40 MDT.

George

Buy as you like, I have nothing to gain or loose either way. The consequences and rewards are all yours.

Kevin
So you bought that TiGoat damper, while you were developing your stove, just for fun? Kinda like Ed's titanium purchases from TiGoat? At least you did not get a discount.

Carbon fiber tent stakes(verbatum) ring a bell?

Versa port, err a versa somthing, ring a bell?

I can go on and on.

The threaded leg thing is sort of the defining feature of a K-stove.

What makes you stand out? You could not even make the only defining and some what origonal thought you had, the bottomless/expandable stove, work. For an engineering and design fee of $1, I will make that concept work for you. Your customers come out on top, and I get to demonstrate that you dont know what you are talking about. The $1 can be paypaled to sales@rutalocura.com

When you actually innovate something, I might give you some credit, until then, you are no better than the hoards of Asian factories churning out poorly interpreted american innovation, that they dont truly understand. You should have called your stoves Bulin.

Isn't there some sort of BPL rule, or precedent, about boycotting people like this? Oh yeah, never mind ;-)

But we bought the damper because a customer did not like something specific about it and mentioned it to us, so we took a look. I in fact have never used the damper and have no idea where it even is.

Is not some sort of threading device used on the roll up it goat stoves. Did Ed not publish a roll up stove in 2002 well before ti goat came out with one.?

There are a lot of original concepts in our gear, so before you go on the attack perhaps you should look at yourself.

We originally had an interchangeable vent / stove jack due to customer suggestion. We moved on to a dedicated vent and stove jack ( that can close) last fall. The concept, while having some merit was to fiddly for us. It is still available on the three person, but the rest have both. The fact of the matter was, almost everyone was using the tents specifically with stoves, so the additional flexibility had little value for us.

Companies should listen to their customers, and try to integrate features customers suggest, we do it often, it's really a part of R&D. We also strive for continuous improvements, such as changing the orientation and cuts of our liners to vertical with a slightly extreme cat cut to result in a tight liner with a dedicated air space that results in very little loss of space.


When companies are young they try different things, for instance dwr tents, but then they move on, it's a natural progression. We have not attempted to blatantly build our business on the back of another vendors forum as some reportedly have.

We communicate openly, and honestly with customers and perspective customers and try to give them the best solution that works for their intended usage. In fact, I have even recommended other tents and stoves on occassion, when I feel our product does not meet a certain feature they desire the most. An example would be that I often say if lightweight is your primary concern, then a cylinder stove is what you will be most happy with. We have even shown our tents to folks that just wanted to build their own and adviced them on the benefits of one seam orientation vs another. We don't pretend to have a patent on a lightweight tipi, nor do we pretend to have some specific guarded knowledge. What we do have is experience in building tents and stoves , with a variety of features and seam orientations combined with very experienced seamstresses, and talented metal workers. We couple that with the fact that we really really strive to go above and beyond on customer service. If you are our customer, we will listen to your suggestions, we will advise you appropriately, we will take care of you to insure enjoyable backcountry outings.

Kevin

No, Ed did not publish a roll up stove in 2002, before TiGoat. I suggest you get your facts straight. As ussual, you dont know what you are talking about. Ed has had a number of cylinder stove designs, and the early ones were all made from cylinder containers, and did not roll up. And none of that would change the fact that he used an industry discount, to purchase materials from TiGoat, to go into business, building stoves for you.

So your stove boots were what dimensions? And how did you come to that?

Come on, its not like people were waiting for 2 years to get a product, so you saw a niche to fill, because people wanted them. When TiGoat went into business, it was done implicitly with a finger in the air to the competition, and a stark contrast in what was offered. If you stood out in some way shape or form, or at least were not so passive in your aggresion, I might respect that.

I am almost always the first to offer a hand to new guys, which is why I have not said much until now. And as for the new guy thing, I'd been in the outdoor industry awhile when I was getting my guides, rooms, and meals comped in Ouray, in 1998, just to put things into "your" realm. I built my first conical tent in spinaker, in 1994, around the same time I sewed my first tarp on an industrial machine. You've been doing this how long?

I did not really read your post, you stand out how?

Do your customers want to know how to make a bottomless stove work?

If your customers told you to jump off a bridge.........

Also, I'm dying to know, did you read any trappers journals before you moved from Texas to Colorado?

I forgot, I sewed my first DWR tent in '94(home machine), nothing new, they still get sewn to this day. That is a matter of mass market, verses more specialized user groups.

And attempting to impugn me on my bad behavior, especially that performed on other forums, wont get you far. I wear it like a jacket, it cold weather. Notice how things got quiet, and its just you and me ;-)

Kevin

One last question: I see that you are doing a tent out of heavier fabric, and a cone stove. You'ld be cool with me doing tents out of heavier fabric, along with a cone stove stove, right?

Well, some one ponied up that dollar, but it wasnt Kevin :-(

As promised, here is how you make a bottomless stove work. Dig out a pit under the stove, roughly 1-2 times the volume of the stove. That part is obvious. To make it function properly, you have to employ the "child in a well" technique. dig/bore a hole ~2-3" in diameter, paralell to the pit under the stove. Dig this to the same depth as the pit under the stove. Now connect the pit under the stove, with the parallel bore, by means of another 2-3" bored hole at their bottoms. This can also be achieved by over excavating and then using foil tubes that are back filled into place. Voila, you now have air intake into the bottom of the expanded burn chamber, which allows the bottomless stove to double or triple its capacity. The burn can be controlled via a ground level "damper" over the parallel bore.

I dont "pretend to have some specific guarded knowledge". Its not pretend, its called a fundamental understanding of the art and science. Something you have failed to demonstrate.

We're cool with me building tents with heavier fabric, and doing cone stoves, right?

So I was contacted by Brian at Wyoming Lost and Found(you think I have an attitude problem :-) He was pretty clear informing me that heavy fabric tipis were his "turf". Upon further examination of the matter, it does appear that the "more durable" tipi market is what he has had staked out for some time now. I wont speak for him, but it was comical to see him level similar charges at SO. So after some interesting negotiations, he is cool with me building heavier fabric tipis.

So, Kevin, Brian says yea, how about you?

Hi Josh

> He was pretty clear informing me that heavy fabric tipis were his "turf".

I slept in a tipi in the 50s, with my father. OK, it was in the backyard, but so what?

In the 80s I helped a young hippie girl at work make a 12' high tipi for herself and her boyfriend. When it was finished she invited us to dinner in it. Double bed in there and all. Stock wooden pallets for a floor. Heavy fabric - like canvas. Big bamboo poles.

But the plans for the tipi came from 'Two Little Savages' by Ernest Thompson Seton, published in 1911. Of course, his plans were taken from standard red Indian tipis probably a hundred or more years old.

To claim any ownership today of any aspect of tipi design is questionable, if nothing else.

Cheers

Edited by rcaffin on 04/15/2012 03:53:26 MDT.

Context, Rodger, context.

Canister stoves are just canister stoves, correct? So when Chinese manufactures, copy numerous features, of a specific stove, especially key features, and names, of established stove designs, your OK with that?

Kevin

Rodger says I'm good to do it too.

Rodger

While we're at it, I'm looking at building and selling tunnel tents too. Do you think you could sell me some of that good Sil you have, at a dicount of course. And to make my R&D a little easier, what are say the 4 or 5 most defining features of your tents. I mean they are already reviewed and tested, so that will help me out considerably. Thanks ;-) At least I ask.

Hi Josh

> So when Chinese manufacturers copy numerous features of a specific stove, especially > key features, and names, of established stove designs, your OK with that?
It's a whole lot more complex than that, at least with China and stoves.

Copying a name is a trademark infringement. That's a No Go.

But copying a stove ... well, it is extremely likely that the Chinese company made the original under contract anyhow. In many cases the design of the stove was not even fully specified by the Western company. They simply provided some sketches of what they wanted, or sketched some small changes to an existing Chinese design. Look at the Gnat for instance: it's simply a rebadged Fire-Maple FMS116T stove. It's also sold by other companies with different logos printed on the side.

Well, canisters? Only a couple of companies fill canisters, and they are mostly in Asia. Dae Ryuk Can Co in Korea makes canisters for Kovea, MSR and many others. All these good canisters seem to use the Lindal valve made by the Lindal company. But they will put any paint job you want on the steel.

You might think that this makes stoves a poor example. However, many cheaper day packs are designed and made by Chinese companies, and then sold to Western companies with an optional logo imprinted on the bag. I get offers for this every week, literally. Other packs are 'designed' by Western companies and made by Chinese companies, but what the Western company often provides are nothing more than marketing sketches of 'what would be nice'. No technical details are provided AT ALL.

What about titanium pots? Most of them are variants on the basic Kingsound pot designs. Kingsound have the technology and the carbide dies to make the pots, so everyone buys them from them, with logos added.

It is easy to claim that A copied B's design for a tipi, and it is easy to even compare photos. But considering that the tipi design is hundreds of years old, and is a Red Indian design anyhow, I really doubt anyone has a leg to stand on.

What counts here is value, performance and service.

It's all a bit of a giggle, really.

Cheers

Hi Josh

> I'm looking at building and selling tunnel tents too.
Good. We need more manufacturers of tunnel tents.

> what are say the 4 or 5 most defining features of your tents. I mean they are already
> reviewed and tested,
Tested, yes.
Reviewed? As they are not commercially available, they haven't been reviewed yet.
Photo'd - for sure.

Yeah, I'm nit-picking. But seriously, no-one thinks I invented tunnels. I have no claim to the basic design. It may be a hard world, but I prefer to focus on providing good design, good performance, and good support. They give me satisfaction.

Cheers
PS: the 4 or 5 defining features? Read the article at the head of this channel: they are all there!

Edited by rcaffin on 04/15/2012 04:22:52 MDT.

Rodger

I'm not suggesting you invented the tunnel tent, that would be ignorant. I'm just asking if I can ride on your coat tails. I dont have a back ground in tunnel tents, I have not done the work, nor do I understand the concepts. So if I can just duplicate your efforts, it will save me allot of time and learning.

But maybe my thinking is wrong. Are all tunnel tents, just tunnel tents? or are there stand out features and designs out there?

So I should just copy from the article?

Rodger

OK, So I read the article. Appearantly tunnel tents, are NOT, just tunnel tents. There appears to be some key features, that define effective designs. So if all tunnel tents are not created equally, and are a function of the sum of their individual attributes and parts, I propose that the same applies to tipi/lavvu/conical/pyrimid tents. Sound reasonable? Now obviously this applies to gnat variants, kingsound pots, and chinese day backs also. The difference being that those are all single source items.

If I remember correctly, you've made a few statements about intelectual property rights before?

.


Edit: I see what is going on here. Carry on.

Edited by kthompson on 04/15/2012 14:59:50 MDT.

Are you cool with Josh using your spelling?

Rodger, roger, its all the same, its just details. A canister stove is a canister stove, a tunnel tent is a tunnel tent, a tipi is a tipi, a Rodger is a rodger, right? The details dont matter.

Hi Josh

> the same applies to tipi/lavvu/conical/pyrimid tents. Sound reasonable?
I guess so. I am just not sure where this is heading.

> you've made a few statements about intelectual property rights before?
That is true, BUT I have also said that there is very little new in this game, so anyone's ability to claim IP rights is very limited. Yes, I support IP rights, but equally I oppose any unjustified extension of a claim beyond what is strictly provable.

In this case, seems to me the IP rights to most tipi features belong to some Red Indian who died hundreds of years ago. I am happy to be shown new and novel features, but they would have to be 'non-obvious to someone skilled in the arts', to use the patent language.

Maybe you should write an article on tipis for BGT?

Cheers

"> the same applies to tipi/lavvu/conical/pyrimid tents. Sound reasonable?
I guess so. I am just not sure where this is heading." -----This may be headed towards a business venture or two, but mostly I'm just reinforcing my claims of bad business practices against Kevin and EdT. But, like my business venture coment suggests, they may really be on to something. That is why I am looking at your tunnel tent a little differently now. Like I said, I dont know anything about them, but maybe I dont need to. That part is appealling

"> you've made a few statements about intelectual property rights before?
That is true, BUT I have also said that there is very little new in this game, so anyone's ability to claim IP rights is very limited. Yes, I support IP rights, but equally I oppose any unjustified extension of a claim beyond what is strictly provable." ----I'm sure my patent lawyer can address this better, but trying to apply the burden and level of novelty, required for a patent is excessive in this case. That does not negate the fact that products are a sum of their parts and features. It is industry norm to borrow and adapt those individual parts, designs, and features, for a number of reasons. Maybe a new use, maybe making something more affordable, maybe making it lighter, etc. But, if you use many individual parts, designs, and features(especially in multiple products) and you are not greatly distinguishable in some way shape of form, from those that came before, ie. innovation, better materials, price, function, etc. You are just copying and profiting, overwhelmingly, on some one elses work. Two reasons to do this. First, you cant innovate on your own, and your not skilled or knowledgable. Second, its much easier to follow in other peoples footsteps. Just like with finished products being a sum of their parts, either one of these on their own is understandable, but togther, they constitute some inexcusable behavior.

"In this case, seems to me the IP rights to most tipi features belong to some Red Indian who died hundreds of years ago. I am happy to be shown new and novel features, but they would have to be 'non-obvious to someone skilled in the arts', to use the patent language." ----The US Patent office disagrees with you on this, and there is long standing history to support their assertion. The first being a patent, on what you would call a "tipi". Its about details, not just one detail, but the sum of many details, and the way they work together. Some parts very key and central, while others work in conjuction with lesser and greater elements to create a unique final product. How unique?, depends on who makes it, and what you compare it to. Also, while I am not exactly indigenous to this continent, some of the folks that call me "Brother", would much prefer the terms American Indian, or First Nations People.

"Maybe you should write an article on tipis for BGT?" -----Maybe, that would be a good way to launch things. Let me start another thread, and ask my potential customers what they would like to see. I am told it is they, that I should listen to on this.

Hi Josh

We welcome any cottage industry serving the light-weight backpacking community. For obvious reasons we (BPL) can't get involved in or adjudicate in any commercial disagreements. We just look for good products, good quality and good support. They are what sells best.

I did a search at www.uspto.gov for the word 'tipi'. Zero hits. Interesting. Not sure exactly what that means though.

I was using the term 'Red Indian' in the context of Seton's books (1911). He was the American version of Baden Powell, and he merged his concept with the Boy Scouts idea very early on.

I eagerly await an article! I can help with the editing if you wish.

Cheers

Try teepee and tent.
I like the one from 1911 from an Australian.

Edited by asdzxc57 on 04/16/2012 07:21:44 MDT.

I just spit food all over the place, I'm laughing so hard. "For obvious reasons we (BPL) can't get involved" Roger suddenly doesnt have an opinion ;-) Obviously the opinions are reserved for the paid content(articles). So BPL(Roger) cant take a stance, but as a manufacture I can write articles, full of opinion, to be peddled to BPL customers? I am further out of touch with current business models than I thought :-) Rodger Dodger.

Hi Tim

OK, I found a couple under 'teepee'. But I couldn't get the images because the USPTO uses some variant of QuickTime which I couldn't download from Apple. WHY they can't use PDF for images I really cannot understand. Very bad decision I think.

The one patent (1988) I could read amazed me. Basically, the author is claiming the basic teepee design. How on earth did that get through????? Does this mean Kifaru, Rota L and SO are all in breach of that patent?

Couldn't find one dated 1911 though. Help?

Cheers

I dont know how that got through, I mean any pointy tent, is just a "tipi". Just like any roundy-round tent is just a tunnel tent, cant be anything unique there. Allot like back packs too, just bags with straps, I mean Otzi had one 5300 years ago, nothing new there. I bet he even had a water bottle holster, sorry Dan. Kinda like them there "Red indians" all the same, nothing distinguishing. I probably should not sweat it, and just go enjoy the 24-7-365 perfect weather outside. Have you ever been through the Patent process?

Hi Josh

To clarify, for everyone:

"For obvious reasons we (BPL) can't get involved"
The only person who can speak for www.backpackinglight.com is the owner, Ryan Jordon. Furthermore, I am not an employee of BPL. But I know what Ryan's policy is: BPL will not get involved in any disputes between competitors. I can state that.

"Roger suddenly doesnt have an opinion"
Er ... hardly! :-)
But my opinions are my opinions, not BPL's.

> Obviously the opinions are reserved for the paid content(articles).
Well, it would be a dead boring life if our articles did not have opinions, wouldn't it? So yes indeed, articles are expected to sometimes present opinions.
But I am sure 'a few' contributors to these Forum channels may also express their opinions at times ...

> So BPL(Roger) can't take a stance, but as a manufacture I can write articles, full of opinion,
Well, as explained above, 'Roger' is NOT the same thing as BPL.
'Roger', or any other contributor, can take a stance or express an opinion. And you as a manufacturer can also take a stance or express an opinion.

Hope this helps
Cheers

Hi Josh

Yes, there are a number of patents with my name on them. I wrote the drafts for some of them myself and had the patent lawyer finalise the claims.
Hard work.

Cheers

Roger --
www.google.com/patents

No quick time issues.

Use Google Patents https://www.google.com/?tbm=pts&hl=en

Using the search term "uspclass:135/100" gives 971 results; the US patent classification 135/100 is Cone-shaped type shelters, e.g., tepee: Shelter which is formed in the shape of an inverted cone.

The search included this result which may be the patent from 1910 being refered to in a previous post: US985243 (BAHAN) Feb 28 1911, a pyramid tent that has a collapsible pole structure where the poles are connected together at the apex.

Another interesting but OT patent is a combined shelter/cape US646421 from 1900.

Searching with "uspclass:"135/100" teepee" gives five patents showing teepee tents.

Barry

It just cant be, nothing new since some "Red indian" invented hundreds of years ago.

Rodger

If you have been through the process, as have I, as have many here, quit acting like you dont understand the subject matter.

So you do, or you dont have an opinion, as a free born individual? I know you do, I've read it a number of times, as have many people on this board. So the opinions are reserved to be sold as "state of the market" "reports" or as "technology" "reports", but they are not excersized on the forum? Or are there some exceptions based on circumstance?

Maybe there was a time when those opinions, sold as something more than, were worth something. My money says thats no longer the case, and is clearly evident.

And yes I'm expressing my opinions, and I'm not dancing around that either.

Hi Barry

Thanks!

It can be fascinating to trawl through the patent data base, and the Google access seems to be vastly better than going direct to USPTO.

Apart from the many wierd and wonderful variants disclosed, what did strike me after a while was the fact that those older patents were no more than a couple of pages of text, with a couple of diagrams. Compare that with some modern patents which manage to exceed the size of an encyclopedia.

Cheers

"Compare that with some modern patents which manage to exceed the size of an encyclopedia"

Hmm, I wonder why, could it be that the sum of the parts that made older patents obtainable, were simple and fewer. But with allot of ground being covered, in design and innovation over time, showing novelty requires more. No, NM, that cant be it.

Hi Josh

If I understand you correctly - yes, I have opinions. We all know that! And I am happy to post them too. Feel free to shoot them down.

What is the difference between an article and a posting on a Forum channel? Fair question.

I would say that an article is much longer, has numerous illustrations, and has to be far more 'composed' that a posting. It can take me many months of work to develop all the data for an article - some of my stove testing articles illustrate that very well. The layout and grammar and clarity have to be worked over into 'good English'. Wandering around the subject, or going OT, is not acceptable in an article. In fact, I try to write my technical articles to a standard comparable with a paper published in a refereed science journal - but in far easier-to-read English!

Postings ... well, we do wander a bit OT at times, don't we all? That's OK for the Forums. Also, many people can contribute to a Forum discussion: that's what the Forum is for, after all. I learn quite a bit from other people's postings.

Cheers
Edited for grammar and spelling...

Edited by rcaffin on 04/17/2012 05:43:38 MDT.

"The layout and grammer and clarity have to be worked over into 'good English'."

Spelling also.

--B.G.--

Bob, It is spelled correctly.

I learn allot from posters here too. I learned that them there "Red indians" built the perfect tent, it could not be improved upon in any way. But I am baffled as to why they did, based on North American weather reports that I recently read, they did not even need tents.

"Bob, It is spelled correctly."

Josh, what year did you drop out of school?

--B.G.--

Hey, I remember seeing the first cylinder stove in 2007 I believe, driving through Utah on my way home after pulling the plug on my brain-dead father. I remember thinking how it was a huge leap over anything out there. Several years later, I copied it, but I did NOT go into business with it. I did give one away though, and the guy ended up posting a link to TiGoat rather than copy the design. I was glad to see that.

This whole thing reminds me of when I was a research scientist, groveling for money by writing Federal grant proposals, getting them uniformly triaged, and then seeing my ideas in print about a year later by several other groups. It eventually put me out of that business.

Life goes on.

Josh, you stayed silent on this for much too long. I was wondering what the hey about all this. Hope that thing I sent worked out for your family.

Vaya con Perro,

Red Indian

Bob

I'm pretty sure dodger is spelled correct, is there an alternate spelling?

No I dont spell very well, TBIs can do that to you, oh well.

"Josh, what year did you drop out of school?" Officially or unofficially? Officially and completely in '95, though I did not attend much from ~'92-'95. I had my first engineering job in '97, I beat out 19 other applicants. I should probably clarify, I dropped out of an alternative high school, the 19 applicants had degrees. In 2008 I tested in the top 1% of graduate MEs(job requirement). I did not even get a T-shirt though :-(

What year did you get your degree?

Lowry

Nice to hear from you, she loved it, especially once we convinced her it wasn't a ladder ;-) I'll be in touch.

Funny, you dont look "red".

Josh, it was Roger that started this off with his use of "grammer."

--B.G.--

Well of course Roger is a grammer.
Only you United Staters are ouncers
(yeah, alright, Burmese too. Mind you they are also slowly metricating themselves...)
Franco

Yeah, not so "red" looking, there's that, and we also used longhouses, not tipis.

Send me a smoke signal over the ether. I'd love to hear from you!

To the rest of the community, lot of interesting stuff here, but I'm afraid I'm the antithesis of UL, so I've not much to offer. Fun for me to lurk and learn though...

"Well of course Roger is a grammer."

Or, is that a grammist?

--B.G.--

Well at least he didn't throw in an extra "u"

Of cors its juust a forim post and i nver miskspell anythin either.

;)